Senses and meanings of primary health care academic visions in nursing / Sentidos y significados de las visiones académicas de la atención/cuidado primaria de salud en enfermería / Sentidos e significados das visões acadêmicas da atenção básica/cuidado em enfermagem

Introduction: Primary Health Care (PHC) has acquired different meanings for different people, at specific times and places, which poses important challenges for its understanding. Objective: To analyze the meaning(s) and sense(s) of Primary/Basic Health Care in the academic views on Nursing/Health in the context of undergraduate Nursing courses offered at two public Higher Education Institutions. Materials and methods: Qualitative study with an exploratory approach. Semi-structured interviews and documentary analysis were used as data collection techniques. Results: The senses/meanings of Primary Health Care converge with the population's gateway to the health system at the first care level and with the first contact of a person with the health service. However, it is still considered as a less important service within the care network. Conclusion: Primary Health Care means a relevant possibility for Nursing/Health care through health promotion and disease prevention actions, with a commitment to respond to most of the population's health needs.

Introducción: La Atención Primaria de Salud ha adquirido diferentes significados para diversas personas, en momentos y lugares específicos, lo cual plantea importantes retos para su entendimiento. Objetivo: Analizar los significados y sentidos de la Atención Primaria de Salud desde una visión académica en Enfermería y en el contexto de cursos de pregrado en Enfermería ofrecidos en dos Instituciones Públicas de Educación Superior. Materiales y métodos: Estudio cualitativo con un enfoque exploratorio, para la recolección de datos se emplearon entrevistas semiestructuradas y análisis documental de contenidos. Resultados: Los sentidos/significados de la Atención Primaria de la Salud convergen con el ingreso de la población al sistema de salud en el primer nivel de atención y la primera experiencia de la persona con el servicio de salud. Sin embargo, dicha Atención Primaria todavía se considera un servicio de baja importancia dentro de la red asistencial. Conclusión: La Atención Primaria de Salud representa una posibilidad relevante para el cuidado de Enfermería a través de acciones de promoción de la salud y prevención de enfermedades, que debe fortalecerse para responder la mayoría de las necesidades de salud de la población.

Introdução: A Atenção Primária à Saúde tem adquirido diferentes significados para diferentes pessoas, em momentos e locais específicos, o que coloca desafios importantes para a sua compreensão. Objetivo: Analisar os sentidos e significados da Atenção Primária à Saúde na perspectiva acadêmica em Enfermagem e no contexto dos cursos de graduação em Enfermagem oferecidos em duas Instituições de Ensino Superior Públicas. Materiais e métodos: Estudo qualitativo com abordagem exploratória, utilizou-se entrevistas semiestruturadas para coleta de dados e análise de conteúdo documental. Resultados: Os sentidos/significados da Atenção Primária à Saúde convergem com a entrada da população no sistema de saúde no primeiro nível de atenção e a primeira experiência da pessoa com o serviço de saúde. Contudo, a referida Atenção Básica ainda é considerada um serviço de baixa importância dentro da rede de saúde. Conclusão: A Atenção Primária à Saúde representa uma possibilidade relevante para o cuidado de Enfermagem por meio de ações de promoção da saúde e prevenção de doenças, que devem ser fortalecidas para responder à maioria das necessidades de saúde da população.

Preventing Sexual Violence: A Behavioral Problem Without a Behaviorally Informed Solution.

What solutions can we find in the research literature for preventing sexual violence, and what psychological theories have guided these efforts? We gather all primary prevention efforts to reduce sexual violence from 1985 to 2018 and provide a bird's-eye view of the literature. We first review predominant theoretical approaches to sexual-violence perpetration prevention by highlighting three interventions that exemplify the zeitgeist of primary prevention efforts at various points during this time period. We find a throughline in primary prevention interventions: They aim to change attitudes, beliefs, and knowledge (i.e., ideas) to reduce sexual-violence perpetration and victimization. Our meta-analysis of these studies tests the efficacy of this approach directly and finds that although many interventions are successful at changing ideas, behavior change does not follow. There is little to no relationship between changing attitudes, beliefs, and knowledge and reducing victimization or perpetration. We also observe trends over time, including a shift from targeting a reduction in perpetration to targeting an increase in bystander intervention. We conclude by highlighting promising new strategies for measuring victimization and perpetration and calling for interventions that are informed by theories of behavior change and that center sexually violent behavior as the key outcome of interest.

Harmonization of clinical practice guidelines for primary prevention and screening: actionable recommendations and resources for primary care.

BACKGROUND: Clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) synthesize high-quality information to support evidence-based clinical practice. In primary care, numerous CPGs must be integrated to address the needs of patients with multiple risks and conditions. The BETTER program aims to improve prevention and screening for cancer and chronic disease in primary care by synthesizing CPGs into integrated, actionable recommendations. We describe the process used to harmonize high-quality cancer and chronic disease prevention and screening (CCDPS) CPGs to update the BETTER program. METHODS: A review of CPG databases, repositories, and grey literature was conducted to identify international and Canadian (national and provincial) CPGs for CCDPS in adults 40-69 years of age across 19 topic areas: cancers, cardiovascular disease, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, diabetes, hepatitis C, obesity, osteoporosis, depression, and associated risk factors (i.e., diet, physical activity, alcohol, cannabis, drug, tobacco, and vaping/e-cigarette use). CPGs published in English between 2016 and 2021, applicable to adults, and containing CCDPS recommendations were included. Guideline quality was assessed using the Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE) II tool and a three-step process involving patients, health policy, content experts, primary care providers, and researchers was used to identify and synthesize recommendations. RESULTS: We identified 51 international and Canadian CPGs and 22 guidelines developed by provincial organizations that provided relevant CCDPS recommendations. Clinical recommendations were extracted and reviewed for inclusion using the following criteria: 1) pertinence to primary prevention and screening, 2) relevance to adults ages 40-69, and 3) applicability to diverse primary care settings. Recommendations were synthesized and integrated into the BETTER toolkit alongside resources to support shared decision-making and care paths for the BETTER program. CONCLUSIONS: Comprehensive care requires the ability to address a person's overall health. An approach to identify high-quality clinical guidance to comprehensively address CCDPS is described. The process used to synthesize and harmonize implementable clinical recommendations may be useful to others wanting to integrate evidence across broad content areas to provide comprehensive care. The BETTER toolkit provides resources that clearly and succinctly present a breadth of clinical evidence that providers can use to assist with implementing CCDPS guidance in primary care.

Reducing the risks when using benzodiazepines to treat insomnia: A public health approach.

Benzodiazepines are widely used but can cause considerable harm, including sedation, addiction, falls, fractures, and cognitive impairment, especially with long-term use and in elderly patients. The authors propose a public health approach to reduce the potential for harm when using benzodiazepines to treat insomnia. Primary prevention involves judicious patient selection and patient education. Secondary prevention requires keeping the duration of use as short as possible according to guidelines. Tertiary prevention, for patients who have been taking a benzodiazepine for a long time, uses shared decision-making to introduce a gradual and carefully monitored taper.

Effects of primary or secondary prevention with vitamin A supplementation on clinically important outcomes: a systematic review of randomised clinical trials with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis.

OBJECTIVES: This systematic review with meta-analyses of randomised trials evaluated the preventive effects of vitamin A supplements versus placebo or no intervention on clinically important outcomes, in people of any age. METHODS: We searched different electronic databases and other resources for randomised clinical trials that had compared vitamin A supplements versus placebo or no intervention (last search 16 April 2024). We used Cochrane methodology. We used the random-effects model to calculate risk ratios (RRs), with 95% CIs. We analysed individually and cluster randomised trials separately. Our primary outcomes were mortality, adverse events and quality of life. We assessed risks of bias in the trials and used Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations (GRADE) to assess the certainty of the evidence. RESULTS: We included 120 randomised trials (1 671 672 participants); 105 trials allocated individuals and 15 allocated clusters. 92 trials included children (78 individually; 14 cluster randomised) and 28 adults (27 individually; 1 cluster randomised). 14/105 individually randomised trials (13%) and none of the cluster randomised trials were at overall low risk of bias. Vitamin A did not reduce mortality in individually randomised trials (RR 0.99, 95% CI 0.93 to 1.05; I²=32%; p=0.19; 105 trials; moderate certainty), and this effect was not affected by the risk of bias. In individually randomised trials, vitamin A had no effect on mortality in children (RR 0.96, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.04; I²=24%; p=0.28; 78 trials, 178 094 participants) nor in adults (RR 1.04, 95% CI 0.97 to 1.13; I²=24%; p=0.27; 27 trials, 61 880 participants). Vitamin A reduced mortality in the cluster randomised trials (0.84, 95% CI 0.76 to 0.93; I²=66%; p=0.0008; 15 trials, 14 in children and 1 in adults; 364 343 participants; very low certainty). No trial reported serious adverse events or quality of life. Vitamin A slightly increased bulging fontanelle of neonates and infants. We are uncertain whether vitamin A influences blindness under the conditions examined. CONCLUSIONS: Based on moderate certainty of evidence, vitamin A had no effect on mortality in the individually randomised trials. Very low certainty evidence obtained from cluster randomised trials suggested a beneficial effect of vitamin A on mortality. If preventive vitamin A programmes are to be continued, supporting evidence should come from randomised trials allocating individuals and assessing patient-meaningful outcomes. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42018104347.

Management of lipid variables in primary cardiovascular prevention: A position paper from the Heart, Vessels and Metabolism Group of the French Society of Cardiology.

Low-density lipoprotein cholesterol has been established as a powerful cardiovascular risk factor; its reduction provides a clinical benefit in primary cardiovascular prevention, irrespective of the characteristics of the patients treated. It is useful to tailor low-density lipoprotein cholesterol targets according to the magnitude of cardiovascular risk (low, high or very high) in order to reduce the cardiovascular risk as fully as possible. In order to provide a uniform approach, it is necessary to propose recommendations for good practice, defining strategies for reducing low-density lipoprotein cholesterol. It is also necessary to know their merits, to analyse their practical limits and to propose adaptations, taking into account limitations and national specifics. This position paper aims to analyse the contribution and limits, as well as the adaptation to French practice, of 2019 and 2021 European Society of Cardiology recommendations for the management of lipid variables and cardiovascular prevention.

Implementation of a Pharmacist-Driven Aspirin Deprescribing Protocol Among Older Veterans in a Primary Care Setting.

Background Recent cardiovascular guideline updates recommend against the use of aspirin for primary prevention of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) in older people. However, aspirin use remains common in this population. Objective To implement and evaluate the benefit of a pharmacist-driven aspirin deprescribing protocol compared with primary care provider (PCP) education-only in a primary care setting. Methods This prospective, cohort project targeted deprescribing for patients prescribed aspirin for primary prevention of ASCVD. Patients were included if they received primary care services at the Milwaukee Veterans Health Administration Medical Center (VHA) and were 70 years of age or older. Criteria for exclusion were aspirin obtained outside the VHA system, aspirin prescribed for a non-ASCVD-related condition, and/or a history of ASCVD. Active deprescribing by pharmacists and PCP education took place in the intervention group with PCP education only in the standard-of-care group. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients who had aspirin deprescribed in each group. Secondary outcomes included patient acceptability of the intervention and barriers to implementation. Results A total of 520 patients were prescribed aspirin in the intervention group versus 417 in the education-only group. Sixty-five patients met intervention criteria and were contacted for aspirin deprescribing. The pharmacist-led active deprescribing group led to a higher rate of aspirin deprescriptions versus the education-only group (54% vs 18%; P = 0.0001) for patients who met criteria. Conclusion A pharmacist-led aspirin deprescribing protocol within a primary care setting significantly decreased the number of aspirin prescriptions compared with PCP education only.

Pharmacist-Led Deprescribing of Aspirin in Older People in an Outpatient Setting.

Background In 2019, the American College of Cardiology and American Heart Association updated their joint guidelines stating low-dose aspirin should not be used on a routine basis for primary prevention of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) among people older than 70 years of age because of increased bleeding risk.1 In addition to these updated guidelines, a statement released by the US Preventive Services Task Force in April 2022 recommends against the initiation of low-dose aspirin for primary prevention of cardiovascular disease in people 60 years of age or older.² Despite these updated recommendations, aspirin continues to be a common medication older patients take, providing an opportunity for a clinical pharmacist deprescribing intervention. Objective To identify the role of a pharmacist-led aspirin deprescribing intervention within a safety-net health system in the outpatient setting. Methods This project included patients 70 years of age and older who had aspirin listed as an active medication without documented ASCVD. This project assessed aspirin deprescribing rates, time spent on pharmacist outreach, and reasons for patient and/or provider refusal to discontinue aspirin. Results One hundred thirty-one eligible patients were contacted. Of those, 78 (60%) patients discontinued aspirin after speaking with the pharmacist, and 8 patients discontinued aspirin after a clinical pharmacist recommendation to the patient's primary care provider (PCP). The median time spent on outreach was approximately eight minutes. Of the 6 patients who consented to the project but declined to discontinue aspirin therapy based on pharmacist intervention, 5 preferred to discuss the issue with their PCP, while 1 patient was told by an outside provider to take aspirin. Conclusion Results indicate the successful impact a clinical pharmacist may have in deprescribing aspirin in a high-risk population. These data may also suggest that an active and intentional approach to deprescribing is likely to be more effective than a written recommendation to providers.

Evaluation of Aspirin Prescribing and Gastrointestinal Bleeding in Adults 60 Years of Age and Older in a Large, Academic Health System.

Background National guidelines no longer recommend adults 60 years of age and older to begin treatment with low-dose daily aspirin for primary prevention of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (CVD) due to a lack of proven net benefit and a higher risk of bleeding. Objective The objective of this cross-sectional retrospective analysis was to evaluate the appropriateness of low-dose aspirin prescribing and subsequent gastrointestinal bleeding in older persons receiving primary care in a large academic health system. Setting Large, academic health system within Colorado. Patients Patients with an active order for daily low-dose aspirin as of July 1, 2021, were assessed for appropriateness based on indication (primary vs secondary prevention) and use of a concomitant proton-pump inhibitor (PPI). Incident gastrointestinal bleeds (GIBs) in the subsequent 12 months and GIB risk factors were also evaluated. Results A total of 19,525 patients were included in the analysis. Eighty-nine percent of patients identified as White and 54% identified as male. Of the total cohort, 44% had CVD and 19% were co-prescribed a PPI. GIB occurred in 247 patients (1.27%) within the subsequent year. Risk factors significantly associated with a GIB within 1 year included: history of GIB, history of peptic ulcer disease, other esophageal issue (esophagitis, Barrett's esophagus, Mallory Weiss tears, etc.), 75 years of age or older, and history of gastroesophageal reflux disease. Conclusion This evaluation found that many older persons at this institution may be inappropriately prescribed aspirin, providing opportunities for pharmacists to improve medication safety by deprescribing aspirin among primary prevention patients or potentially co-prescribing a PPI in secondary prevention patients.

Interactions between antiepileptic drugs and direct oral anticoagulants for primary and secondary stroke prevention.

INTRODUCTION: Direct oral anticoagulants (DOAC) are the guideline-recommended therapy for prevention of stroke in atrial fibrillation (AF) and venous thromboembolism. Since approximately 10% of patients using antiepileptic drugs (AED) also receive DOAC, aim of this review is to summarize data about drug-drug interactions (DDI) of DOAC with AED by using data from PubMed until December 2023. AREAS COVERED: Of 49 AED, only 16 have been investigated regarding DDI with DOAC by case reports or observational studies. No increased risk for stroke was reported only for topiramate, zonisamide, pregabalin, and gabapentin, whereas for the remaining 12 AED conflicting results regarding the risk for stroke and bleeding were found. Further 16 AED have the potential for pharmacodynamic or pharmacokinetic DDI, but no data regarding DOAC are available. For the remaining 17 AED it is unknown if they have DDI with DOAC. EXPERT OPINION: Knowledge about pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic DDI of AED and DOAC is limited and frequently restricted to in vitro and in vivo findings. Since no data about DDI with DOAC are available for 67% of AED and an increasing number of patients have a combined medication of DOAC and AED, there is an urgent need for research on this topic.

Lack of Prognostic Value of T-Wave Alternans for Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator Benefit in Primary Prevention.

BACKGROUND: New methods to identify patients who benefit from a primary prophylactic implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) are needed. T-wave alternans (TWA) has been shown to associate with arrhythmogenesis of the heart and sudden cardiac death. We hypothesized that TWA might be associated with benefit from ICD implantation in primary prevention. METHODS AND RESULTS: In the EU-CERT-ICD (European Comparative Effectiveness Research to Assess the Use of Primary Prophylactic Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillators) study, we prospectively enrolled 2327 candidates for primary prophylactic ICD. A 24-hour Holter monitor reading was taken from all recruited patients at enrollment. TWA was assessed from Holter monitoring using the modified moving average method. Study outcomes were all-cause death, appropriate shock, and survival benefit. TWA was assessed both as a contiguous variable and as a dichotomized variable with cutoff points <47 µV and <60 µV. The final cohort included 1734 valid T-wave alternans samples, 1211 patients with ICD, and 523 control patients with conservative treatment, with a mean follow-up time of 2.3 years. TWA ≥60 µV was a predicter for a higher all-cause death in patients with an ICD on the basis of a univariate Cox regression model (hazard ratio, 1.484 [95% CI, 1.024-2.151]; P=0.0374; concordance statistic, 0.51). In multivariable models, TWA was not prognostic of death or appropriate shocks in patients with an ICD. In addition, TWA was not prognostic of death in control patients. In a propensity score-adjusted Cox regression model, TWA was not a predictor of ICD benefit. CONCLUSIONS: T-wave alternans is poorly prognostic in patients with a primary prophylactic ICD. Although it may be prognostic of life-threatening arrhythmias and sudden cardiac death in several patient populations, it does not seem to be useful in assessing benefit from ICD therapy in primary prevention among patients with an ejection fraction of ≤35%.

Cost effectiveness of implantable cardioverter defibrillators for 1.5 primary prevention of sudden cardiac arrest in China: an analysis from the Improve SCA study.

OBJECTIVES: Implantable cardioverter defibrillator (ICDs) for primary prevention (PP) of sudden cardiac arrest (SCA) is underutilized in developing countries. The Improve SCA study has identified a subset of 1.5 primary prevention (1.5PP) patients with a higher risk of SCA and a significant mortality benefit from ICD therapy. From the perspective of China's healthcare system, we evaluated the cost-effectiveness of ICD therapy vs. no ICD therapy among 1.5PP patients with a view to informing clinical and policy decisions. METHODS: A published Markov model was adjusted and verified to simulate the course of the disease and describe different health states of 1.5PP patients. The patient characteristics, mortality, utility and complication estimates were obtained from the Improve SCA study and other literature. Cost inputs were sourced from government tender prices, medical service prices and clinical experts' surveys in 9 Chinese public hospitals. For both ICD and no ICD therapy, the total medical costs and quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) were modelled over a lifetime horizon and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was calculated. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to assess the uncertainty of the model parameters. We used the willingness-to-pay (WTP) threshold recommended by China Guidelines for Pharmacoeconomic Evaluations, one to three times China's GDP per capita (CNY85,698-CNY257,094) in 2022 Chinese Yuan. RESULTS: The incremental cost effectiveness ratio (ICER) of ICD therapy compared to no ICD therapy is 139,652 CNY/QALY, which is about 1-2 times China's GDP per capita. The probability that ICD therapy is cost effective was 92.1%. Results from sensitivity analysis supported the findings of the base case. CONCLUSIONS: ICD therapy compared to no ICD therapy is cost-effective for the 1.5PP patients in China.

Towards an Electronic Health Prevention Record Based on HL7 FHIR and the OMOP Common Data Model.

BACKGROUND: Approximately 40% of all recorded deaths in Austria are due to behavioral risks. These risks could be avoided with appropriate measures. OBJECTIVES: Extension of the concept of EHR and EMR to an electronic prevention record, focusing on primary and secondary prevention. METHODS: The concept of a structured prevention pathway, based on the principles of P4 Medicine, was developed for a multidisciplinary prevention network. An IT infrastructure based on HL7 FHIR and the OHDSI OMOP common data model was designed. RESULTS: An IT solution supporting a structured and modular prevention pathway was conceptualized. It contained a personalized management of prevention, risk assessment, diagnostic and preventive measures supported by a modular, interoperable IT infrastructure including a health app, prevention record web-service, decision support modules and a smart prevention registry, separating primary and secondary use of data. CONCLUSION: A concept was created on how an electronic health prevention record based on HL7 FHIR and the OMOP common data model can be implemented.

Primary Prevention of Cardiovascular Disease for People Living with Human Immunodeficiency Virus.

People living with HIV (PLWH) have a risk of cardiovascular disease (CVD) that is 1.5 to 2 times higher than the general population owing to traditional risk factors, HIV-mediated factors like chronic inflammation and immune dysfunction, and exposure to antiretroviral therapy. Currently available CVD risk estimation calculators tend to underestimate risk in PLWH but can be useful when an individual's HIV history is considered. Improving modifiable risks is the primary intervention for reducing CVD risk in PLWH. Statin therapy is important for specific individuals, but attention should be given to drug interactions with antiretroviral agents used to treat HIV.

De-imFAR phase II project: a study protocol for a cluster randomised implementation trial to evaluate the effectiveness of de-implementation strategies to reduce low-value statin prescribing in the primary prevention of cardiovascular disease.

INTRODUCTION: This study aims to reduce potentially inappropriate prescribing (PIP) of statins and foster healthy lifestyle promotion in cardiovascular disease (CVD) primary prevention in low-risk patients. To this end, we will compare the effectiveness and feasibility of several de-implementation strategies developed following the structured design process of the Behaviour Change Wheel targeting key determinants of the clinical decision-making process in CVD prevention. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A cluster randomised implementation trial, with an additional control group, will be launched, involving family physicians (FPs) from 13 Integrated Healthcare Organisations (IHOs) of Osakidetza-Basque Health Service with non-zero incidence rates of PIP of statins in 2021. All FPs will be exposed to a non-reflective decision assistance strategy based on reminders and decision support tools. Additionally, FPs from two of the IHOs will be randomly assigned to one of two increasingly intensive de-implementation strategies: adding a decision information strategy based on knowledge dissemination and a reflective decision structure strategy through audit/feedback. The target population comprises women aged 45-74 years and men aged 40-74 years with moderately elevated cholesterol levels but no diagnosed CVD and low cardiovascular risk (REGICOR<7.5%), who attend at least one appointment with any of the participating FPs (May 2022-May 2023), and will be followed until May 2024. We use the Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation and Maintenance (RE-AIM) framework to evaluate outcomes. The main outcome will be the change in the incidence rate of PIP of statins and healthy lifestyle counselling in the study population 12 and 24 months after FPs' exposure to the strategies. Moreover, FPs' perception of their feasibility and acceptability, and patient experience regarding the quality of care received will be evaluated. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study was approved by the Basque Country Clinical Research Ethics Committee and was registered in ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04022850). Results will be disseminated in scientific peer-reviewed journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04022850.

Impact of preventive substrate catheter ablation on implantable cardioverter-defibrillator interventions in patients with ischaemic cardiomyopathy and infarct-related coronary chronic total occlusion.

AIMS: Primary prevention patients with ischaemic cardiomyopathy and chronic total occlusion of an infarct-related coronary artery (CTO) are at a particularly high risk of implantable cardioverter-defibrillator (ICD) therapy occurrence. The trial was designed to evaluate the efficacy of preventive CTO-related substrate ablation strategy in ischaemic cardiomyopathy patients undergoing primary prevention ICD implantation. METHODS AND RESULTS: The PREVENTIVE VT study was a prospective, multicentre, randomized trial including ischaemic patients with ejection fraction ≤40%, no documented ventricular arrhythmias (VAs), and evidence of scar related to the coronary CTO. Patients were randomly assigned 1:1 to a preventive substrate ablation before ICD implantation or standard therapy with ICD implantation only. The primary outcome was a composite of appropriate ICD therapy or unplanned hospitalization for VAs. Secondary outcomes included the primary outcome's components, the incidence of appropriate ICD therapies, cardiac hospitalization, electrical storm, and cardiovascular (CV) mortality. Sixty patients were included in the study. During the mean follow-up of 44.7 ± 20.7 months, the primary outcome occurred in 5 (16.7%) patients undergoing preventive substrate ablation and in 13 (43.3%) patients receiving only ICD [hazard ratio (HR): 0.33; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.12-0.94; P = 0.037]. Patients in the preventive ablation group also had fewer appropriate ICD therapies (P = 0.039) and the electrical storms (Log-rank: P = 0.01). While preventive ablation also reduced cardiac hospitalizations (P = 0.006), it had no significant impact on CV mortality (P = 0.151). CONCLUSION: Preventive ablation of the coronary CTO-related substrate in patients undergoing primary ICD implantation is associated with the reduced risk of appropriate ICD therapy or unplanned hospitalization due to VAs.

European and US Guideline-Based Statin Eligibility, Genetically Predicted Coronary Artery Disease, and the Risk of Major Coronary Events.

BACKGROUND: A study was designed to investigate whether the coronary artery disease polygenic risk score (CAD-PRS) may guide lipid-lowering treatment initiation as well as deferral in primary prevention beyond established clinical risk scores. METHODS AND RESULTS: Participants were 311 799 individuals from the UK Biobank free of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease, diabetes, chronic kidney disease, and lipid-lowering treatment at baseline. Participants were categorized as statin indicated, statin indication unclear, or statin not indicated as defined by the European and US guidelines on statin use. For a median of 11.9 (11.2-12.6) years, 8196 major coronary events developed. CAD-PRS added to European-Systematic Coronary Risk Evaluation 2 (European-SCORE2) and US-Pooled Cohort Equation (US-PCE) identified 18% and 12% of statin-indication-unclear individuals whose risk of major coronary events were the same as or higher than the average risk of statin-indicated individuals and 16% and 12% of statin-indicated individuals whose major coronary event risks were the same as or lower than the average risk of statin-indication-unclear individuals. For major coronary and atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease events, CAD-PRS improved C-statistics greater among statin-indicated or statin-indication-unclear than statin-not-indicated individuals. For atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease events, CAD-PRS added to the European evaluation and US equation resulted in a net reclassification improvement of 13.6% (95% CI, 11.8-15.5) and 14.7% (95% CI, 13.1-16.3) among statin-indicated, 10.8% (95% CI, 9.6-12.0) and 15.3% (95% CI, 13.2-17.5) among statin-indication-unclear, and 0.9% (95% CI, 0.6-1.3) and 3.6% (95% CI, 3.0-4.2) among statin-not-indicated individuals. CONCLUSIONS: CAD-PRS may guide statin initiation as well as deferral among statin-indication-unclear or statin-indicated individuals as defined by the European and US guidelines. CAD-PRS had little clinical utility among statin-not-indicated individuals.